Tax Rate Cut Not Really A Break, Resident Says

September 17, 1986|By TODD NELSON, Staff Writer

WILTON MANORS -- A resident said his analysis showed a 28 percent property tax rate increase, scaled down from a 70 percent increase proposed earlier, was not necessarily the tax break it appeared to be.

Resident Andy Ellis said that while city officials chopped away at the proposed tax increased they raised the amount of revenue expected from franchise fees, utility taxes and other charges, the cost of which residents would bear.

``It puts it right back up where they would have been under a 70 percent tax increase,`` Ellis said.

The City Council on Thursday approved a $3.7 million budget for the 1986-87 fiscal year and adopted a property tax rate of $4.56 per $1,000 of assessed value, about 28 percent from the currenct rate of $3.56 per $1,000.

Under the new rate, the owner of a home valued at $75,000 who claimed the $25,000 homestead exemption would pay $228 in city taxes next year, about $50 more than this year.

To lower the amount of revenue property taxes would have had to bring in, the City Council transferred $290,177 from its sewer surplus, a fund set aside to pay for water and sewer system improvements.

Ellis cited several increases planned for next year`s budget that he said would have the same effect, allowing a lower tax rate but generating an equivalent amount of revenue.

Specifically, he pointed to: an increase in franchise fees, to $580,00 from $543,000 the year before; in utility taxes, to $643,000 from $508,000; and in charges for services, to $72,000 from $35,000.

Finance Director Sharon King said individual circumstances prompted each of those increases. Only the transfer from the sewer surplus was deliberately taken to reduce the tax rate, she said.

The city expects greater revenue from franchise fees because of growth and has not moved to amend its franchise agreements to increase the percentage collected, King said.

The increase in utility tax revenue stems from one-half percent increase in taxes on local gas and electric bills, King said. Finally, most of the increase in charges for services was necessary to cover increases in the cost of a number of city recreation programs, King said.